I see that many of you are experienced in eruopean styles of fencing. However, lots of movies today are choreographed like Asian films, primarily because it “looks cool”. Would the twirling make any sense in this case? I always thought of it as one of those twirling kicks in martial arts, when executed properly of course.
Well the abstraction you point out is, in essence correct, but as for any authenticity to any of the combat, no, there was none in that movie. Heck most of the battles and many of the details were completely wrong, from the battle of Sterling Bridge (there was no bridge in the movie), to what they were wearing. William Wallace did NOT fight in a kilt and war paint. The guy would have worn a complete suit mail armor.
No, not really, not from what I’ve seen heard at least. I do know a few people invovled in Japanese sword arts, and they too say that most asian martial arts movies are just dancing around.
In Mel’s defense, he was originally going to film that properly. However, it seems that the area that had reserved to film on rained constantly, and they never managed to to got it. The film version had to be slapped together on an emergency basis at th last minute.
Right. Here’s what I mean: A gallon of milk is not particularly heavy. Holding it at arms length for more than a minute or so, and it will feel much heavier as your arm tires. That’s what I’m talking about.
I’m not familiar with that term. Regardless, I’m talking about the moive idea of a swordsman (or guy with bo, nuchaku, what-haveyou) spinning the weapon about as he moves into battle. Pointless, and likely to make you drop it on your foot.
I think we’re in agreement here. I’m just saying that you want to parry with the spine or flat of a blade, not the edge, if you can avoid it.
Here, I’m thinking of the classic “swords blades meet, one fighter spirals the blade around, thus sending his opponent’s sword spinning away into the corner” bit used in terrible swashbuckling movies. Sure, there are some legit disarming maneuvers, but I don’t really expect to see them used that often in practice. The goal in fighting with a blade is to kill or disable. Disarming is difficult and not really worth the time and effort.
Er…yes, they are. Even the slimmest of rapiers gets heavy when held at arm’s length for a lengthy period of time. Most blades are considerably heavier than that to start with.
OK. They still aren’t giving dramatic speeches, which was my point.
Actually, I seem to recall a french school of quarterstaff fighting that strongly involved spinning the staff hand over hand quite rapidly.
Well, considering how no one here is a Samurai, Midevel Knight or Roman Legionaire, nor has actually seen a swordfight to the death I have to question anyone stating the “accuracy” of movie swordfighting with absolute certainty.
That said, backed by my brief exposure to sport fencing and my knowledge of movie trivia, I am willing to bet the following:
-Grabbing an edged sword with your bare hand will likely result in the loss of a finger and/or permenant nerve damage
-Being run through by a sword is likely fatal
-Perfect technique is probably discarded as two oponents close wrestle and attempt to stick their swords into each other
-Being slashed by a sword, if not fatal, still hurts a lot and will slow you down
-There probably is not a lot of jumping over, ducking under or doing the throw your hands in the air pose as the blade slices your outer layer of clothing.
-Getting touched anywhere by any part of a meter of sharp steel results in unpleasentness
-I have to imagine that armored knights realized that it is relatively useless to bang against each other and that they would attempt to wedge their weapons between the armored plates to get to the juicy center within.
Though I’ve never tried it, folks from the Higgins Armory in Worcester pursue European weapons-fighting of all types, but chiefly swords of various eras, and I’ve been to several of their demonstrations (Our seven-year-old daughter has a particularly bloodthirsty streak in her, and she loves these.) They gave a demonstration of knights-in-armor fighting that plays out exactly as you say, and totally unlike what you normally see onscreen. They base their fighting on period manuals and the like, so they are well-rersearched. Knights in armor, when gighting each other, grabbed the sword surprisingly close to the tip with one hand (gauntlet?) to give them better control in placing the tip between the opponents’ armored plates. They also thwacked each other a lot with the flat of the blade to knock each other off-balance.
Knowing nothing about actual sword fighting, the sword fight near the end ofDangerous Liaisons between John Malkovich and Keanu Reeves seemed realistic in that two closely matched opponents were going at it so long that they could barely catch their breath.
What about older samurai films like The Seven Samurai and Yojimbo? These never seemed very fancy, just very fast, which may have been more realistic or just easier to film.
If you want to know more about historic and movie swordfighting and dueling than you ever thought was written down… By The Sword , a book by a fencing master and, IIRC, the pupil of one of the men who trained Flynn, tells you every mother loving thing about the duel. Not warfare, but the duel and swordplay, from god knows when to now.
I opened this thread up b/c I took a quarter of fencing in HS gym–very cool class, and my HS had a fencing program–yay! Even if they don’t display good technique etc, I love a good sword fight in a movie–at least it takes some skill, unlike the blast 'em away with a large gun scene so favored today…
But I had to quote above because that is just silly.
Um…LOTR takes place in a mythical land that is similiar to our pre-machine age.
How does anyone know if their technique is “historically accurate”?
Just askin’
Also–I was under the impression that to be “pinked” was to lose the duel, but also that it was not fatal. Not every chest wound equals death. Can anyone help?
Well a gallon of milk will weigh close to 8 pounds, no?
That’s roughly 3 times the weight of a medieval two-handed longsword, which averaged from aorund 2.5 to 3.5 pounds. Arming swords (or short swords), depending on their style could weight about the same to a bit less. Rapiers would weigh close to this as well, with some weighing a bit less as well.
I can do drills at full speed for roughly the same amount of time I could do Karate drills at full speed (which is a pitiful 15 minutes, I need to get in better shape!).
Yeah, this doesn’t happen, unless the fighter being disarmed is one major butterfingers 
See above. I’d expect two people in good physical condition to get tired at about the same time (roughly) from either swordplay or say boxing/wrestling.
You’re right, none of us here are Knights, BUT we do have a large community of Historical martial artists which have drawn on the following to ‘revive’ historicla martial arts:
- Historical Treatises and combat manuals.
- Modern historical research.
- Modern recreation and scientific study using accurate replicas and antiques.
This gives us a susprisingly detailed picture of how combat was done from the high middle ages, to the renaissance.
The further back we go in time, however, the blurrier the picture becomes. As far as I know there simply aren’t enough sources to recreate say gladiatorial combat.
Bare hand, yes, but a decent gauntlet will protect you. The hand was commonly used to displace and beat aside incoming thrusts in rapier play. With cutting swords, there is much more danger, and usually you wouldn not just leave your hand out there, but when the combat came close, the hand could be used to trap a blade, grab the hilt, shove your opponent, throw him, grpaple with him, etc, etc.
I’m not sure I knwo what you mean with this. Perfect technique is involved in ALL aspects of sword combat, wether than be at range, close in, or grappling.
Right. First off the sword is not the optimal weapon to be using against a heavily armored foe. A pole arm or spear would be better.
When swords were being used, you would try and place the point where it could do damage, and not just try and cut at each other, as that would have little effect.
In the case of the longsword, a half-sword guard would be taken where the blade is gripped with one hand about the middle of it’s length, giving the knight more control and power on the thrust, as well as more leverage for grappling techniques - essentially turning the sword into a powerful, short spear.
I know little about classical fencing, which that particular smallsword duel would fall under, but I have heard people comment on it as well. It does seem to be fairly accurate.
Yeah you’re right. What I emant to say is that combat portrayed looks nothign like medieval combat, but does look exactly like any other portrayal of it on the screen. In otherwords, it’s the same stage combat tought to choreographers and actors.
Also a lot of things from the movie play into the typical stereotypes that go along with stage combat such as innefective guards, twirlign around, ducking under swords, flipping up in the air, etc, etc.
Another thing I just remembered, and is typical of movies is the apparent inffectiveness of armor. In LoTR you saw guys in three quarters harness taking a sword CUT on their breastplate, and just doubling over and dying, or being killed by a rock being thrown at them. You had to ask yourself: why did they were the armor? It apparently didn’t do a damn thign to help them out.
Duels varied in rules (or lack thereof) depending where you were, and what time period you foudn yourself in.
It is true that during certian times, and in certian places, duels could be fought until first blood, and did not necessarily required one of the people involved ot be killed.
I’ve just finished reading this book, and wish to second the endorsement.
Fascinating and informative.
Actually, after the invention of plate swords began to dissappear from the battlefield, at least against knights. Hammers and axes took over, along with pikes and halberds.
:eek:
The devil you say!
We have extensive readings of Gladiatorial combat. It may not be exactly reproduced in full, but we can make pretty darn good reproductions since we have many blow-by-blow fighting accounts, training descriptions, and we know what kind of equipment they had.
Besides, while exact training styles differ, there re really only a few ways to wield most weapons, and while weapon styles differ, it basically comes down to variations on swords, spears, and bows.